Discussion
Adrian W said:
Anyone who doesn't think that the new owners said we need to cut ex costs, who do we get rid of is naïve.
Team of 700+ Vs sponsor income that doesn't even meet the new cost caps..Even without investors clearly looking to slim down and exit it was true that this team really needed thinning out.
HustleRussell said:
It would be a highly belligerent new manager who decides that nothing can be learned from asking the opinions of the workforce they have inherited?
+1Not asking the existing team what could be done to make their jobs better/easier/more efficient would be the height of arrogance.
No positive chat in here about it but- didn’t Williams have a superb and encouraging weekend? Both drivers producing excellent qualifying times, George starting P10 with tyre choice and running 8th until a PU issue took him out of the race.
People need to get over their negative slant on Williams. They are improving and figuring in the pack at all circuits. The necessary changes are being made to make the team effective under the budget cap.
Their car is three years old but they are still finding things.
People need to get over their negative slant on Williams. They are improving and figuring in the pack at all circuits. The necessary changes are being made to make the team effective under the budget cap.
Their car is three years old but they are still finding things.
CallMeLegend said:
I genuinly belive they are making moves in the right direction. Some of the cars pace at the weekend was no doubt down to George, but even Nick got some speed from the car, I'm guessing relisticly it's a car that is probably an 8th place in constructors, possibly 7th on a good day
Hopefully they can have similar performance for this weekend but keep the air in the car without any top ups.CallMeLegend said:
I genuinly belive they are making moves in the right direction. Some of the cars pace at the weekend was no doubt down to George, but even Nick got some speed from the car, I'm guessing relisticly it's a car that is probably an 8th place in constructors, possibly 7th on a good day
100% agree. We know George is the real deal, but Latifi has also shown that there is some talent there, and he might be able to step it up a little next season. If you think not so long ago it was 'dead last' for them for the whole of each weekend, they have really made strides - they dont appear to have got it all to gel together in terms of reliability, speed, tactics etc like the best teams but there are improvements everywhere, they are very much not 'dead last' recently. When they put it all together into a weekend they are going to be right in the midfield mix.
WHEN they get those first points on the board, I'll be chuffed to bits for them (and I bet the team is going to be absolutely thrilled). Not if, but when. Maye even this weekend.
Adrian W said:
I looked at the Williams website to see if it gave any details about GR's bad day, whoever writes it have had a charisma transplant, it reads like it was written by a accountant or lawyer
This is an area they could do with taking a leaf out of Mclarens book! CallMeLegend said:
I genuinly belive they are making moves in the right direction. Some of the cars pace at the weekend was no doubt down to George, but even Nick got some speed from the car, I'm guessing relisticly it's a car that is probably an 8th place in constructors, possibly 7th on a good day
They absolutely are.The problem is (very much my problem..) that I find it very hard to get excited as it's not 'Williams' as it was that's improving. It was always going to be possible they could have accepted a deeper partnership with Mercedes and get all sorts of support and technology in return and work towards midfield respectability. Claire/Frank could have said yes to that years ago, saved themselves a load of bother and would still have their team..
But that wasn't the point or target of Williams - they existed to seek to win GP's and Titles, which they could never do as a b-team, they didn't even like being a customer of PU's because of the data exchange required..
If there could have been a practical and tolerable (for Claire and Frank) way of achieving those ambitions that would have delighted me, even if they only ever got part way there. But alas, I just don't really get excited by an investment firm that buys a team to stabilise it then re-sell at a profit because in doing so, they will and have removed what made Williams quite unique.
Flooble said:
I'm still amazed an investment firm decided that buying an F1 team was a way to make money 
Suspect it's to do with them failing and being relatively cheap to pick up ahead of the budget caps, and then post budget caps less investment than previously required would (has) make the team more competitive, at least competitive enough to claim they're improving.Then factor that with the $200m to register a new team, and their asset 'the team' suddenly has an effective minimum value - useful for when the time comes they look to sell the team.
Flooble said:
I'm still amazed an investment firm decided that buying an F1 team was a way to make money
As Ross Brawn showed, if you can buy at the right price and then demonstrate an uplift in performance, you've got a valuable asset. More relevant to the times we're living in, the budget cap essentially turns an F1 team into a US-style "franchise owner." The Williams family were clearly trying to hold out to reach that point; by essentially running out of money so close to the "winning post" they lost out on the long-term prize, but were at least able to realise some value (given that the bridge funding required to get there was comparatively small).skwdenyer said:
Flooble said:
I'm still amazed an investment firm decided that buying an F1 team was a way to make money
As Ross Brawn showed, if you can buy at the right price and then demonstrate an uplift in performance, you've got a valuable asset. More relevant to the times we're living in, the budget cap essentially turns an F1 team into a US-style "franchise owner." The Williams family were clearly trying to hold out to reach that point; by essentially running out of money so close to the "winning post" they lost out on the long-term prize, but were at least able to realise some value (given that the bridge funding required to get there was comparatively small).The problem was that the team remained too big for too many years of poor performance to be justified - and naturally with poor performance sponsorship income dropped so they then had this huge team and factory with a shoebox teams revenue. By trying to hang on to more than was realistic, they lost everything. And it was so obvious that would happen - the stubbornness baffled me. Or at least, it did at the time, I have eventually accepted that it's likely the same stubbornness that sped up the demise was probably rooted in the determination that made the team a success in the first place.. And in the end, it was the families (Franks) team, they built it, it's literally 'their business' what they did with it.
TheDeuce said:
They were trying to hang on, I agree - in fact Claire was speaking up for and almost campaigning for the budget cap for years. She wanted it even lower than it ended up being announced at.
The problem was that the team remained too big for too many years of poor performance to be justified - and naturally with poor performance sponsorship income dropped so they then had this huge team and factory with a shoebox teams revenue. By trying to hang on to more than was realistic, they lost everything. And it was so obvious that would happen - the stubbornness baffled me. Or at least, it did at the time, I have eventually accepted that it's likely the same stubbornness that sped up the demise was probably rooted in the determination that made the team a success in the first place.. And in the end, it was the families (Franks) team, they built it, it's literally 'their business' what they did with it.
I fear there was also the small matter of redundancy payments to contend with - strange as it may seem, sometimes businesses living hand-to-mouth just can't afford to let staff go!The problem was that the team remained too big for too many years of poor performance to be justified - and naturally with poor performance sponsorship income dropped so they then had this huge team and factory with a shoebox teams revenue. By trying to hang on to more than was realistic, they lost everything. And it was so obvious that would happen - the stubbornness baffled me. Or at least, it did at the time, I have eventually accepted that it's likely the same stubbornness that sped up the demise was probably rooted in the determination that made the team a success in the first place.. And in the end, it was the families (Franks) team, they built it, it's literally 'their business' what they did with it.
skwdenyer said:
TheDeuce said:
They were trying to hang on, I agree - in fact Claire was speaking up for and almost campaigning for the budget cap for years. She wanted it even lower than it ended up being announced at.
The problem was that the team remained too big for too many years of poor performance to be justified - and naturally with poor performance sponsorship income dropped so they then had this huge team and factory with a shoebox teams revenue. By trying to hang on to more than was realistic, they lost everything. And it was so obvious that would happen - the stubbornness baffled me. Or at least, it did at the time, I have eventually accepted that it's likely the same stubbornness that sped up the demise was probably rooted in the determination that made the team a success in the first place.. And in the end, it was the families (Franks) team, they built it, it's literally 'their business' what they did with it.
I fear there was also the small matter of redundancy payments to contend with - strange as it may seem, sometimes businesses living hand-to-mouth just can't afford to let staff go!The problem was that the team remained too big for too many years of poor performance to be justified - and naturally with poor performance sponsorship income dropped so they then had this huge team and factory with a shoebox teams revenue. By trying to hang on to more than was realistic, they lost everything. And it was so obvious that would happen - the stubbornness baffled me. Or at least, it did at the time, I have eventually accepted that it's likely the same stubbornness that sped up the demise was probably rooted in the determination that made the team a success in the first place.. And in the end, it was the families (Franks) team, they built it, it's literally 'their business' what they did with it.
When the top teams started to ramp up their budgets, effectively paying to win - or at least to have the potential to win, I would say that, from a cold hard business perspective, was the time Williams became untenable as top team contender and. Sad as it might be, that should also have been the time to gently reset ambitions and transition the team via increased technical partnership with a top team and reducing their own staff and facilities burden..
We'll never know what could have been of course. I think they probably could have battled successfully for fourth/top of midfield teams very successfully and sustainably - but only if they had reformated the team to fit those ambitions.
C Lee Farquar said:
The customer 'B' teams don't seem to be doing much better, Haas and Alfa/Sauber having 2 points between them.
There's different degrees of 'partnership' between customer and supplier teams. They could have taken more from Merc and still maintained a high level of autonomy. They could have outsourced more, bought in more components to save money but still focused on their in house expertise and talent in areas they are strong.The problem is there was no middle ground or compromise was there? They were adamant they would only buy engines, and would do everything else in house ala traditional constructor.
They could have been able to fight with Renault/McLaren perhaps, which I'm sure would have made their sponsors happier this era than the way it turned out..
TheDeuce said:
C Lee Farquar said:
The customer 'B' teams don't seem to be doing much better, Haas and Alfa/Sauber having 2 points between them.
There's different degrees of 'partnership' between customer and supplier teams. They could have taken more from Merc and still maintained a high level of autonomy. They could have outsourced more, bought in more components to save money but still focused on their in house expertise and talent in areas they are strong.The problem is there was no middle ground or compromise was there? They were adamant they would only buy engines, and would do everything else in house ala traditional constructor.
They could have been able to fight with Renault/McLaren perhaps, which I'm sure would have made their sponsors happier this era than the way it turned out..
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff